scholarly journals Addressing Suicide Risk According to Different Healthcare Professionals in Spain: A Qualitative Study

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan-Luis Muñoz-Sanchez ◽  
María Cruz Sánchez-Gómez ◽  
María Victoria Martín-Cilleros ◽  
Esther Parra-Vidales ◽  
Diego de Leo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Emergency Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Suicidal Behaviour ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Main Concern ◽  
Patients At Risk

OBJETIVE: This study analyses the views of four groups of healthcare professionals who may play a role in the management of suicidal behaviour. The goal was to identify key factors for suicide prevention in different areas of the healthcare system. METHODOLOGY: Qualitative research was conducted using focus groups made up of different healthcare professionals who participated in the identification, management and prevention of suicidal behaviour. Professionals included were primary care physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists and emergency physicians. RESULTS: ‘Suicide’ was amongst the most relevant terms that came up in discussions most of the times it appeared associated with words such as ‘risk’, ‘danger’ or ‘harm’. In the analysis by categories, the four groups of professionals agreed that interventions in at-risk behaviours are first in importance. Prevention was the second main concern with greater significance among psychiatrists. DISCUSSION: Primary care professionals claim for more time to address patients at risk for suicide and an easier access to and communication with the mental health network. Emergency care professionals have a lack of awareness of their role in the detection of risk for suicide in patients who seek attention at emergency care facilities for reasons of general somatic issues. Mental health care professionals are in high demand in case of self-harm but they would like to receive specific training in dealing with g suicidal behaviour.

scholarly journals Addressing Suicide Risk According to Different Healthcare Professionals in Spain: A Qualitative Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (10) ◽  
pp. 2117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan-Luis Muñoz-Sánchez ◽  
María Sánchez-Gómez ◽  
María Martín-Cilleros ◽  
Esther Parra-Vidales ◽  
Diego de Leo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Suicidal Behavior ◽  
Emergency Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Main Concern ◽  
Patients At Risk

This study analyzes the views of four groups of healthcare professionals who may play a role in the management of suicidal behavior. The goal was to identify key factors for suicide prevention in different areas of the healthcare system. Qualitative research was conducted using focus groups made up of different healthcare professionals who participated in the identification, management, and prevention of suicidal behavior. Professionals included were primary care physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists, and emergency physicians. ‘Suicide’ was amongst the most relevant terms that came up in discussions most of the times it appeared associated with words such as ‘risk’, danger’, or ‘harm’. In the analysis by categories, the four groups of professionals agreed that interventions in at-risk behaviors are first in importance. Prevention was the second main concern with greater significance among psychiatrists. Primary care professionals call for more time to address patients at risk for suicide and easier access to and communication with the mental health network. Emergency care professionals have a lack of awareness of their role in the detection of risk for suicide in patients who seek attention at emergency care facilities for reasons of general somatic issues. Mental health care professionals are in high demand in cases of self-harm, but they would like to receive specific training in dealing with suicidal behavior.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the Fracture Liaison Service within the Canadian Healthcare Setting

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Matthew Wong-Pack ◽  
Nawazish Naqvi ◽  
George Ioannidis ◽  
Ramy Khalil ◽  
Alexandra Papaioannou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Osteoporotic Fractures ◽  
Fracture Liaison Service ◽  
Care Physician ◽  
Osteoporosis Management ◽  
Patients At Risk ◽  
Fracture Liaison ◽  
Canadian Healthcare

Previous studies evaluating fracture liaison service (FLS) programs have found them to be cost-effective, efficient, and reduce the risk of fracture. However, few studies have evaluated the clinical effectiveness of these programs. We compared the patient populations of those referred for osteoporosis management by FLS to those referred by primary care physicians (PCP), within the Canadian healthcare system in the province of Ontario. Specifically, we investigated if a referral from FLS is similarly effective as PCP at identifying patients at risk for future osteoporotic fractures and if osteoporosis therapies have been previously initiated. A retrospective chart review of patients assessed by a single Ontario rheumatology practice affiliated with FLS between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2017, was performed identifying two groups: those referred by FLS within Hamilton and those referred by their PCP for osteoporosis management. Fracture risk of each patient was determined using FRAX. A total of 573 patients (n = 225 (FLS group) and n = 227 (PCP group)) were evaluated. Between the FLS and PCP groups, there were no significant differences in the absolute 10-year risk of a major osteoporotic fracture (15.6% (SD = 10.2) vs 15.3% (SD = 10.3)) and 10-year risk of hip fracture (4.7% (SD = 8.3) vs 4.7% (SD = 6.8)), respectively. 10.7% of patients referred by FLS and 40.5% of patients referred by their PCP were on osteoporosis medication prior to fracture. Our study suggests that referral from FLS is similarly effective as PCP at identifying patients at risk for future osteoporotic fractures, and clinically effective at identifying the care gap with the previous use of targeted osteoporosis therapies from referral from PCP being low and much lower in those referred by FLS. Interventional programs such as FLS can help close the treatment gap by providing appropriate care to patients that were not previously identified to be at risk for fracture by their primary care physician and initiate proper medical management.

scholarly journals Knowledge and attitudes of primary care physicians in the management of patients at risk for cardiovascular events

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamidreza Doroodchi ◽  
Maziar Abdolrasulnia ◽  
Jill A Foster ◽  
Elyse Foster ◽  
Mintu P Turakhia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Knowledge And Attitudes ◽  
Patients At Risk

General Practice Recruitment for People at Risk of Schizophrenia: The Buckingham Experience

2000 ◽  
Vol 34 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. A131-A136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian R. H. Falloon
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
At Risk ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Psychotic Disorders ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Signs And Symptoms ◽  
Psychotic Episode

Objective The process of detecting people at high risk of schizophrenia from a community sample is a major challenge for prevention of psychotic disorders. The aim of this paper is to describe early detection procedures that can be implemented in primary care settings. Methods A selected literature review is supplemented by experiences and data obtained during the Buckingham Integrated Mental Health Care Project. Results General medical practitioners have been favoured as the agents most likely to prove helpful in detecting the key risk factors that predict the onset of schizophrenic disorders, as well as in recognising the earliest signs and symptoms of these conditions. However, the practical problems of screening for multiple and subtle risk factors in general practice are substantial, and general practitioners (GPs) often have difficulty recognising the earliest signs of a psychotic episode. A range of strategies to assist GPs detect early signs of psychosis in their patients are considered. Conclusions It is feasible to implement primary care setting early detection procedures for people at risk of schizophrenia. Implementation is aided by the use of a brief screening questionnaire, training sessions and case supervision; and increased collaboration with mental health services and other community agencies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document